|
No Armenian Genocide Resolution from the House of Representatives: Lessons for Future |
|
|
Wednesday, 2 May 2007* View by Barin Kayaoglu
Until last week, Turkish policy-makers were quite concerned that the U.S. House of Representatives might pass a resolution recognizing the events of 1915 as a genocide against the Armenian people. Foreign Minister Abdullah G+-l and Chief of General Staff Gen. Yaşar B+-y+-kanıt had spent time in Washington in February talking to American officials, explaining the dangers of such a resolution.
April 24 (the symbolic anniversary that the Armenians claim was when their "genocide" began in 1915) has come and gone and it seems that the resolution has been conveniently swept under the rug.
That is very auspicious. Turkish politics is quite volatile right now because of the presidential elections. On the one hand, there is much cause to be hopeful that it is civil society and not the military that is framing the debate. (Friday night's press statement by the Turkish General Staff has thrown things off course but Turkey has the capacity to sustain the turmoil.) People are voicing contrasting opinions in different forums, most conspicuously in mass demonstrations. Perhaps for the first time, the demos (people) are pushing for their kratos (rule) in Turkey.
The genocide bill could have changed that. The feeling of being "surrounded" worsens Turkish people's approach to regional and international events. Discussions of the Armenian question are still hostage to that feeling. As the Washington-based PEW Center's surveys indicate, an overwhelming majority of Turkish people ÔÇô justifiably or not ÔÇô perceive the United States as the greatest danger for world peace at the moment. It is astonishing to note that Turkey, a formal U.S. ally, records highest anti-U.S. sentiment in the Middle East. One reason is that Turks believe that the United States is deliberately provoking PKK-instigated terrorism from Northern Iraq.
Thus, had the resolution passed, American legislators could have caused catastrophic damage to Turkish-American relations.
Substantively, a resolution would not have meant much. Turkey would have still been an important regional power while the United States would have continued its course as a global superpower. It would have been cataclysmic, however, for ordinary Turks to become completely incensed at the United States and to force their leaders to take a tougher stance against Washington. Turkish decision-makers would have followed suit.
In an ideal world, Turkey and Armenia should have solved their problems long ago. However, the events of 1915 relate to the very genesis of the two nations' self-perception. Both sides are unwilling to accept that their ancestors did more than they admitted. Guilt was mutual, although the degree of responsibility can be disputed.
But a self-righteous bill from Capitol Hill would have added fuel to fire and derailed the respectable (albeit small) Turkish and Armenian efforts to come to an understanding. For the first time since World War I, Turkish and Armenian scholars are listening to the arguments of the "other" side and they are doing it in a civilized manner. Some are even accepting the viewpoints of the "other" side. For the first time, there is a possibility that Friedrich Hegel's "thesis + antithesis = synthesis" assertion can apply to Turks and Armenians.
It is worth noting that the House resolution was probably shelved in order not to aggravate the situation in Turkey. However, Turkish people should bear in mind that such resolutions and declarations do not mean much. It takes historians a lot of research, writing, editing, and re-editing to reach conclusion on historical events. For poorly-informed politicians to skip that process and pretend that they know more about history than historians do is unfair.
Just as it is unfair for politicians to disrespect historians, it is equally imprudent for statesmen and the public to react in an immature way to decisions that are a result of a poor understanding of history.
Next year, both the United States and Turkey may face the same predicament over the issue of whether the tragedies of 1915 were a genocide or not. Opinion and decision-makers should focus on cajoling public and political opinion that there is no need for botched responses. Overall, the best course to take would be to leave the affair to Turks and Armenians.
1 May 2007
+++
Barın Kayaoğlu is a Ph.D. student in history at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, Virginia and a regular contributor to the Journal of Turkish Weekly.
E-mail: kayaoglu@virginia.edu
|
Wednesday, 2 May 2007
View by Barin Kayaoglu
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LATEST NEWS
FROM AMERICAS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MOST VISITED NEWS (DAILY) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
